I'm rereading the Harry Potter books (I'm halfway through Goblet of Fire) right now and I had an interesting thought:

I think the Weasleys aren't nearly as innocent and friendly as they appear to be. I think they basically attached themselves to Harry to use his fame for their own gain in the beginning. Think about it. They likely recognized him on the train platform in Sorceror's Stone...hell, they probably highly encouraged Ron, Fred and George to "bump" into him on the Hogwarts Express and befriend him. Think about it, the Weasleys are very poor and lacking in influence in the Wizarding world. HP is the biggest celebrity in that world...having him as a close family friend/informally adopted son opens a lot of doors for them. It clearly helps Arthur out in the Ministry, it gets them cool things like box seat tickets to the Quidditch World Cup, reinforces a relationship with other influential wizards like Dumbledore, etc etc. It would make total sense for them to nurture and maintain that connection.

So yeah, those Weasleys are a bit craftier than they might appear on the surface. I also tend to wonder why they're so poor? Arthur works for the gov't...presumeably the ministry pays fairly well. 3 of their sons get pretty good jobs. Considering basically all of their kids are gone most of the year, why aren't they a 2 income family if they're that poor? Isn't Molly qualified for anything? Couldn't she at least work part-time or something?

__________________Bonded to Brita

"We caught them in an alley on skid row in downtown Philly and brought them down with Uzi's and dogs. I beat the shit out of one of the guys for resisting arrest. After that, I went home, fried up some tofu with strawberry preserves and melon sticky rice, laid down on the couch with my snuggie and ate rose petals in sweet daisy wine sauce and watched Mamma Mia on DVD and then cried myself to sleep."

Seriously, we got to see enough of Arthur and Molly that I don't think there's any chance of them being as conniving as you speculate. Now, Fred and George? They're good guys, but being able to wave about their connection with the Great Harry Potter was indubitably something they used with great aplomb whenever they could. I just don't think they'd have abused that relationship. And Ron... really just isn't bright enough to think of it.

As for their financial straits - I don't remember if it's really stated outright or if it's just between the lines, but Arthur's Muggle Studies job seems like it's a joke in the Ministry more than anything. A couple of people in the wizarding world understand that muggles are more relevant than most think, but I don't think anyone working high up in the Ministry gives half a crap about them really. And as for why Molly doesn't work - well, honestly, they're the ol' literary standby "poor but happy" family.

__________________
Stating your opinion as a fact doesn't make it any less your opinion.

No one cares, no one sympathizes
You just stand around and play synthesizers

Seriously, we got to see enough of Arthur and Molly that I don't think there's any chance of them being as conniving as you speculate. Now, Fred and George? They're good guys, but being able to wave about their connection with the Great Harry Potter was indubitably something they used with great aplomb whenever they could. I just don't think they'd have abused that relationship. And Ron... really just isn't bright enough to think of it.

As for their financial straits - I don't remember if it's really stated outright or if it's just between the lines, but Arthur's Muggle Studies job seems like it's a joke in the Ministry more than anything. A couple of people in the wizarding world understand that muggles are more relevant than most think, but I don't think anyone working high up in the Ministry gives half a crap about them really. And as for why Molly doesn't work - well, honestly, they're the ol' literary standby "poor but happy" family.

I agree on Ron...but I tend to think Arthur and Molly gave him a gentle push to "befriend" the poor confused boy they meet on the platform fully knowing its the famous Harry Potter. I dont think they really abuse the situation but I'm sure they didn't ignore the obvious implications of befriending someone like HP.

__________________Bonded to Brita

"We caught them in an alley on skid row in downtown Philly and brought them down with Uzi's and dogs. I beat the shit out of one of the guys for resisting arrest. After that, I went home, fried up some tofu with strawberry preserves and melon sticky rice, laid down on the couch with my snuggie and ate rose petals in sweet daisy wine sauce and watched Mamma Mia on DVD and then cried myself to sleep."

Harry benefited from his relationship with the Weasley's more than they did with Harry.

- thier son dies
- their other son has his ear removed
- their other other son is mauled by a werewolf and the long-term affects of that are still unclear

The financial gain that they "leveraged" from their relationship with Harry amounted to a couple of free rides, and a LOT of beaurocratic headaches.

As for their financial status, the 2 oldest may have jobs, but I didn't get the impression that working with dragons was exactly lucrative, or that Bill contributed to the family expenses. Percy was aliented from the family for most of his tenure and was certainly not contributing.

George and Fred were in the beginning stages of starting a business, no extra money there.

As a guy, I figured you'd factor in the cost of housing and feeding FIVE boys, not to mention clothing them in expensive private school duds. I'm thinking they're still paying it all off.

Besides which, the Weasley/ Prewitt combination is about as "good" as you'll get.

Kids dont cost money...they make money. You just have to force them to sew wallets for export. On Hogwart's tuition, you'd think they'd get some sort of Magic Pell Grant to help with that or at least some tax breaks. We know that there's a program in place for destitute Wizards to attend the school (as Tom Riddle used it and there's no indication that Harry ever had to pay tuition...though he should of as he was apparently fairly wealthy thanks to his inheritance.

Seriously though, with magic available, why is money so important for them anyway? Why cant they conjure up what they need when it comes to basic necessities.

And I didn't mean to imply that their gain was merely financial...they probably gained lots of influence in the end too. I'm sure Arthur has far more connections after the war with Voldemort than he did previously in his dead end gov't job.

__________________Bonded to Brita

"We caught them in an alley on skid row in downtown Philly and brought them down with Uzi's and dogs. I beat the shit out of one of the guys for resisting arrest. After that, I went home, fried up some tofu with strawberry preserves and melon sticky rice, laid down on the couch with my snuggie and ate rose petals in sweet daisy wine sauce and watched Mamma Mia on DVD and then cried myself to sleep."

Kids dont cost money...they make money. You just have to force them to sew wallets for export. On Hogwart's tuition, you'd think they'd get some sort of Magic Pell Grant to help with that or at least some tax breaks. We know that there's a program in place for destitute Wizards to attend the school (as Tom Riddle used it and there's no indication that Harry ever had to pay tuition...though he should of as he was apparently fairly wealthy thanks to his inheritance.

Seriously though, with magic available, why is money so important for them anyway? Why cant they conjure up what they need when it comes to basic necessities.

And I didn't mean to imply that their gain was merely financial...they probably gained lots of influence in the end too. I'm sure Arthur has far more connections after the war with Voldemort than he did previously in his dead end gov't job.

The Fourth Law of ...something something. It's in the last book. Can't make something from nothing. It's why the kids can't use magic to feed themselves when they're out camping the moors.

The Fourth Law of ...something something. It's in the last book. Can't make something from nothing. It's why the kids can't use magic to feed themselves when they're out camping the moors.

Sometimes I get the feeling that Rowling "occasionally" just made things up as she went along...

__________________Bonded to Brita

"We caught them in an alley on skid row in downtown Philly and brought them down with Uzi's and dogs. I beat the shit out of one of the guys for resisting arrest. After that, I went home, fried up some tofu with strawberry preserves and melon sticky rice, laid down on the couch with my snuggie and ate rose petals in sweet daisy wine sauce and watched Mamma Mia on DVD and then cried myself to sleep."

On Hogwart's tuition, you'd think they'd get some sort of Magic Pell Grant to help with that or at least some tax breaks. We know that there's a program in place for destitute Wizards to attend the school (as Tom Riddle used it and there's no indication that Harry ever had to pay tuition...though he should of as he was apparently fairly wealthy thanks to his inheritance.

There's no evidence anyone paid tuition at Hogwarts, is there? IIRC that fund is specifically stated to be for books and so on.

There's no evidence anyone paid tuition at Hogwarts, is there? IIRC that fund is specifically stated to be for books and so on.

Hmm...good point. Damn socialist wizards with their free education.

__________________Bonded to Brita

"We caught them in an alley on skid row in downtown Philly and brought them down with Uzi's and dogs. I beat the shit out of one of the guys for resisting arrest. After that, I went home, fried up some tofu with strawberry preserves and melon sticky rice, laid down on the couch with my snuggie and ate rose petals in sweet daisy wine sauce and watched Mamma Mia on DVD and then cried myself to sleep."

Who befriended who? I think it was Harry who stuck with Ron and who needed a friend more. Ron would do alright without Harry. Harry was confused about a lot of things and needed a steady friend with an uncomplicated life.

Who befriended who? I think it was Harry who stuck with Ron and who needed a friend more. Ron would do alright without Harry. Harry was confused about a lot of things and needed a steady friend with an uncomplicated life.

Yeah, that's what the Weasleys wanted you to think. They're quite crafty when you really look at it.

__________________Bonded to Brita

"We caught them in an alley on skid row in downtown Philly and brought them down with Uzi's and dogs. I beat the shit out of one of the guys for resisting arrest. After that, I went home, fried up some tofu with strawberry preserves and melon sticky rice, laid down on the couch with my snuggie and ate rose petals in sweet daisy wine sauce and watched Mamma Mia on DVD and then cried myself to sleep."

Speaking of suspicious things in Harry Potter, what was up with the Goblet of Fire? I mean, the whole point is to

Spoiler:
get Harry to touch the enchanted trophy, right?

Couldn't the villains just put that same spell on a pencil or something and hand it off in the first chapter? Why go through a whole crazy tournament?

Well, you see, it was like one of those, um, things where it had to look like an accident or something...and like that was the only way...yeah, that's the ticket.

__________________Bonded to Brita

"We caught them in an alley on skid row in downtown Philly and brought them down with Uzi's and dogs. I beat the shit out of one of the guys for resisting arrest. After that, I went home, fried up some tofu with strawberry preserves and melon sticky rice, laid down on the couch with my snuggie and ate rose petals in sweet daisy wine sauce and watched Mamma Mia on DVD and then cried myself to sleep."

I think they tried something like that in one of the other books, and then some crazy fan girl ate the necklace Harry was supposed to start wearing, or something*.

The GoF was an attempt to avoid Harry's ta'veren influence, and it worked well enough. I would say that makes it one of the better Evil Genius Schemes.

* I'm just a bit vague on the exact details, as you may notice.

What's wrong with using an overly elaborate yet easily escapable plot to have him killed?

I mean, sure, Voldemort could have just ordered a lackey to kill him but where's the fun in that? I mean, its not like Fake Mad Eye could have killed him or anything in the ENTIRE YEAR they were together with very little supervision. Voldemort never fully understood the power of Rowling that protected Harry.

__________________Bonded to Brita

"We caught them in an alley on skid row in downtown Philly and brought them down with Uzi's and dogs. I beat the shit out of one of the guys for resisting arrest. After that, I went home, fried up some tofu with strawberry preserves and melon sticky rice, laid down on the couch with my snuggie and ate rose petals in sweet daisy wine sauce and watched Mamma Mia on DVD and then cried myself to sleep."

the plot has a few things
first Voldemort is obsessed with killing harry himself. Second voldemort needs harrys blood so harrys wont kill him everytime he touches harry. next I believe it took some time to gather the necessary ingredients for voldemorts rebirth. And i figure that the bad guys were trying to make harrrys death look like an accident in the maze as voldemort likes to work from the shadows.

what i dont get is why they had to cancel quiditch

__________________Crown Prince of Younglings
Theorylands Official Fairy Wrangler
Colonel in the Colbert Nation
the only Zfairy dust for sale 8.99 per vial
"YES!" - Cary Sedai